In the Anglophone Academy most of Eliade's "friends" (Long, Girardot, Doniger, Beane, Paden, Kripal) simply dedicated themselves to their own research, no doubt influenced by Eliade, but without focusing specifically on his thought. His "opponents," on the other hand (Leach, Strenski, Segal, McCutcheon, Corless, Wasserstrom, Lincoln), had their own theoretical agendas, usually inspired by the materialistic and anti-religious sentiments of the late 20th century, before turning their attention to the Romanian Chicago professor. Using his work as a "straw man"  to demonstrate and justify their own positions, they failed to give Eliade's oeuvre a fair and adequate reading. That oeuvre is so extensive as to require prolonged analysis before drawing reliable conclusions, making it all too easy to use in support of preconceived notions. Anglophone scholars are not inclined to learn Romanian to read his early works, and not enough of these works have been translated into English to make them otherwise accessible. Thus, not enough fully-informed analyses of Eliade's work have been produced in English.